Federal education funding to teach socialism amounts to establishing the
secular religion of socialism as the official national church.

The following letter was mailed to Supreme Court Justices Rehnquist,
Scalia, and Thomas:

Dear Mr. Chief Justice:

This letter is in regard to the Court's recent decision in the
Washington State religious scholarship case. The purpose is not to
disagree specifically with the Court's decision, but to question what
constitutes a religion, the establishment of which is prohibited by the
First Amendment.

It can be demonstrated that secular and materialistic socialism is a
religion. That being the case, any use of Federal funds by public
schools and universities for the teaching of socialistic doctrine
constitutes a prohibited establishment of a specific religion.

That socialism is a religion:

Socialism's codifier, Henri de Saint-Simon, himself called socialism
a religion. His last major work was entitled The New Christianity.
Saint-Simon said that the highest socialistic regulatory council should
control education so that nothing but the catechism of social justice
might be taught (e.g., Darwinian evolution, multiculturalism, Keynesian
economics, deconstruction, legal realism, and critical studies).

Saint-Simon's more famous colleague Auguste Comte went so far as to
create The Religion of Humanity as part of his materialistic philosophy
of Positivism.

Comte's Religion of Humanity was approvingly cited by John Stuart
Mill in his Chapters on Socialism, in which he mused that the
educational system should be changed to indoctrinate the people with the
principles of socialism.

The late Bertrand Russell, one of the world's most prominent
spokesmen for socialism, said of the World War I German socialist party,
"For Social Democracy is not a mere political party, nor even a mere
economic theory; it is a complete self-contained philosophy of the world
and of human development; it is, in a word, a religion and an ethic. To
judge the work of Marx, or the aims and beliefs of his followers, from a
narrow economic standpoint, is to overlook the whole body and spirit of
their greatness." (from Lecture One, German Social Democracy).

Irving Howe was, as you know, a leading New York socialist
intellectual after World War II, as well as the founding editor of Dissent magazine. In A Margin of Hope: An Intellectual
Autobiography, he wrote, "Call it liberal, call it social
democratic, a politics devoted to incremental reform even while still
claiming a utopian vision, how can such a politics satisfy that part of
our imagination still hungering for religious exaltation, still drawn to
gestures of heroic violence, still open to the temptations of the
apocalypse? Perhaps it was recognition of this fact that led the
leadership of the European social democracy in the years just before the
First World War to maintain some of the "revolutionary" symbols and
language of early Marxism, though their parties had ceased to be
revolutionary in any serious respect. Intuitively they grasped that the
parties they led were not just political movements but, in some sense,
branches of a "church" "

In A Yippie Manifesto, published in May 1969, Jerry Rubin
wrote, "America and the West suffer from a great spiritual crisis. And
so the yippies are a revolutionary religious movement.A
religious-political movement is concerned with peoples souls, with the
creation of a magic world which we make real.We offer: sex, drugs,
rebellion, heroism, brotherhood. They offer: responsibility, fear,
puritanism, repression."

To round out the liberals' own characterization of socialism as a
religion, start by comparing the similarities in structure between
socialism and Christianity. Each has a theory about human nature that
prescribes conditions of daily life and holds forth a promise of future
redemption for all of humanity, a vision of future perfection that
becomes a controlling factor in the daily lives of Christians and
socialists. Christians look to salvation and life after death.
Liberal-socialists look to The Religion of Humanity's promise of
perfection of man and society, here on earth, by means of materialistic
structures planned and administered by intellectuals.

For liberals, there being no God, the ultimate source of legitimacy
and authority is the ever-changing ideas of social justice in the minds
of intellectuals. Applying that view to our Constitution is the process
of judicial activism.

Christianity, like it or not, was the sole unifying structure of
Western Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire. For the
Judeo-Christian tradition, Original Sin was humans over-reaching to
become God-like by eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge in the
Garden of Eden. The message was that humans are God's creatures and must
obey God's Will. Neither Salvation, return to the Garden of Eden, nor
eternal bliss, is possible within this world.

Socialism exhibits all the same elements: a Garden of Eden (the State
of Nature), original sin, and a promise of salvation revealed in sacred
texts delivered by revered prophets. For socialists, Original Sin was
the invention of private property and the resulting scramble of
individuals to amass property, which introduced greed, avarice,
aggression, crime, and wars. But unlike Christianity, socialist
salvation is attainable without divine intervention, through the
political state, by future generations here on earth.

Socialist salvation, however, is not an individual matter. It applies
to the collective masses, in which individuals have no political
significance beyond their class identity. Be it noted that our nation
was incontrovertibly founded on principles of individualism, not secular
and materialistic collectivism.

To be considered true religions, doctrinal beliefs must achieve
multi-national and cross-cultural acceptance. Socialism clearly
qualifies, having spread from Western Europe to all parts of the world.
It has been adopted by countries in the Middle East, Africa, and the Far
East, including three of the most populous nations in the world: Russia,
India, and China. Great religions commonly are associated with the lives
and teachings of larger-than-life individuals such as Moses, Buddha,
Jesus, or Mohammed. Socialism qualifies in that respect also. Henri de
Saint-Simon, Auguste Comte, Karl Marx, and Charles Darwin delivered
their revelations of materialistic Truth in the first sixty years of the
1800s.

Marx has become a mythical, god-like figure to billions of people
around the world. American school children are taught that Darwin was
the embodiment of science and truth, despite the fact that there exists
not a single proof of his speculative theory (see Cal-Berkeley law
professor Phillip E. Johnson's Darwin on Trial and Gertrude
Himmelfarb's Darwin and the Darwinian Revolution). Thomas Huxley
and American socialists like John Dewey used Darwinian evolution theory
as a battering ram against morality and spiritual religions,
particularly Christianity.

John Adams said that the Constitution was made for a moral and
religious people, self-constrained by individual morality; that it would
work for no other. Darwin's "bulldog," Thomas Huxley, said that there is
no such thing as sin, merely the struggle for survival. Dewey taught
that there is no morality, because material conditions are the sole
source of human nature, and those conditions change continually in
Darwinian fashion. Their fellow socialists Hitler and Stalin found
nothing to quibble about in those doctrines.

The prophets of the socialist religion proclaimed that human nature
could be returned to its State-of-Nature benevolence by the abolition of
private property. Political societies, indeed all of humanity, could be
perfected here on earth by restructuring government to place it in the
hands of intellectual planners. The state-planner, the minister of
socialist religion, sees himself as a modern-day Moses uniquely
qualified by his knowledge about the so-called Immutable Law of History
to guide humanity to earthly perfection, back to the Original State of
Nature.

That the secular and materialistic religion of liberalism (the
American sect of the international religion of socialism) is
antithetical to and wholly incompatible with the fundamental principles
of our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution; proselytizing
with Federal funds for the religion of socialism is therefore
unconstitutional:

The American War of Independence was based philosophically upon John
Locke's Second Treatise, which was founded entirely in natural
law. The legitimization for both the ouster of James II and George III
was that each had broken the natural-law compact that postulated
inalienable, individual natural-law rights to life, liberty, and
property. "No taxation without representation."

Jefferson's references in the Declaration to "The Laws of Nature and
of Nature's God" are meaningless except in the context of natural law.
Ditto with regard to the Bill of Rights.

Natural law, since Aristotle, has been identified with the
teleological, intelligent-design paradigm of the cosmos. Aristotle's
natural law, via Aquinas's Summa Theologica, opened the field of
European medieval law to the concept of separation of church and state
into political and spiritual realms. One dealt with making people good
citizens, the other with making people good humans. Both were rooted in
natural law, and natural law was God-given. This was the entire
foundation of everything that we now call Western civilization.

Everyone from Franklin to Washington continually invoked the Deity's
blessings for the success of the American cause of independence, and
later the Constitution. But American liberal-socialism demands that only
the secular doctrine of socialism and Comte's Positivism be taught in
our schools. Because of support from our Federal courts, socialism has
been established as the only scientific truth. The natural-law,
spiritual-religion foundation of our nation has been dismissed as
ignorance from a pre-scientific age. If that position holds, then the
Declaration and the Constitution are meaningless drivel that "evolves"
in Darwinian evolutionary fashion, subject only to random, chaotic
materialistic forces.

As our first socialist Supreme Court Justice, Oliver Wendell Holmes,
repeatedly wrote, there is no such thing as a higher law of morality,
merely whatever a particular judge thinks that the law ought to be. As
you know, Holmes opined that, if secular materialism changed public
opinion to the belief that we should scrap the Constitution and
institute Bolshevism, then neither the Court not the Constitution should
stand in the way. That contempt for tradition and precedent, for the
entirety of Western civilization, has, too often since the 1920s,
informed Federal judicial practice, making the Constitution into a
Rorschach ink-blot.

The materialistic and secular doctrine of socialism, pushed by the
ACLU (e.g., the Scopes monkey trial), liberal-socialist
politicians, and the teachers' unions, in effect decapitates Western
civilization. We see this daily in denigration of subject matter
produced by "dead white men" and John Dewey's maxim that "dead" history
has no place in the Progressive Education curriculum. William F.
Buckley, Jr., documented it in his 1951 God and Man at Yale, and
Alan Charles Kors and Harvey A. Silverglate have updated it in The
Shadow University: The Betrayal of Liberty on Americas Campuses.

Saint-Simon and John Dewey were correct in perceiving that control of
education is the most effective way to destroy the essence of Western
civilization and replace it with the secular and materialistic religion
of socialism. We may hope that education will be rebalanced to require
fair presentation of the doctrinal foundations of our Constitution, as
well as the dogma of liberal-socialism.

May we hope that the Federal judiciary will abandon its suicide pact
with the liberal-socialists?